top | item 25446480

(no title)

m0nty | 5 years ago

> Why can't we, as a society, react with the same effectiveness to air pollution?

In the UK at least, the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) is a powerful lobby group. Car sales are used as a key economic indicator. Cars have long been seen as aspirational and a measure of personal success. Cars support other sectors of the economy such as civil engineering (roads, bridges), petroleum sales and car accessories, parts and repairs..

Cycling and walking on the other hand? Not so much, despite the many benefits. Just recently, there has been a move in some areas to introduce low-traffic neighbourhoods and create more cycle-ways. The hoo-ha has been deafening. It causes congestion, it blocks emergency vehicles, it increases air pollution because cars are at a standstill. (According to critics.) Newspapers have been running stories about how evil and undemocratic this is, and dear old Nigel Farage seems to have re-invented himself as an anti-cycling campaigner.

I don't think there's an actual conspiracy - there usually isn't. But the status quo serves the interests of some powerful and wealthy groups, and it takes a strong-willed government to overrule them. They'd rather hand-wave about meeting 'green' targets by 2060, and meantime hope that electric vehicles arrive in sufficient numbers to eliminate or ameliorate the problem. The alternatives cause so much political friction that they seem impossible to implement, at least without more courage than our politicians are used to showing.

discuss

order

dfgdghdf|5 years ago

Indeed. What's really crazy is how the "anti" side has managed to claim to be the side of the working class, fighting against a "green liberal elite". This trope is incredibly harmful; the poor don't even own cars in London, yet breathe the most polluted air.

m0nty|5 years ago

And immediately anyone mentions restricting traffic, they're all about the disabled, older people, ambulances and essential deliveries, when really all they seem to want is to drive their cars as often and far as they like, without restrictions. It really is infuriating.

TheOperator|5 years ago

I see the anti-side as more arguing that they're middle class. People wealthy enough to afford to not bicycle or take the bus, but of modest enough means that taxes can mean putting car ownership out of reach. The "Liberal elite" is putting a very manageable burden on the rich, actively promoting means of transit that help the poor, and is expecting the middle class to just suffer through the requisite sacrifices. It's a compelling narrative so long as you don't expect to live another 50 years in which case it's a rather dense one becuase you will actually have to pay the interest on your choices today.

What truly baffles me is people who are anti-immigrarion, anti-migrant, and anti-refugee but also against any form of regulation on carbon emissions. As if they don't quite grasp that if your goal is to reduce migration than environmental policy matters more than even immigration policy.